R JANARDHANAN Vs. COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) UNDER a partition deed dated December 31, 1951, the joint family immovable properties of one Bheema Naidu were divided. The parties to the document were the said Bheema Naidu, his widowed daughter-in-law and four sons of his deceased son of whom two were minors. The properties described in the B, C, D, E and F schedules to the document were allotted to the widow and her four sons, respectively, to be enjoyed by them absolutely. The joint family owned a house in a large area of ground measuring 12 acres 86 cents. This is stated to be the family house. In respect of this house, the disposition in the partition deed was as follows :

(2.) TWO of the minor sons who became major later constituted a Hindu undivided family consisting of individuals, their wives and children. In respect of the assessment years 1968-69 and 1969-70, each of them separately submitted the returns under the Wealth-tax Act and claimed deduction in the returns of a sum of Rs. 1,00,000 under section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act in respect of the house which is item No. 1 of schedule A to the partition deed above stated. The Wealth-tax Officer rejected this claim on the ground that Ranganayaki Ammal, the assessee's mother, has a life interest and "she being a life tenant, the assessee could not use the bungalow for residential purposes and only the life tenant could use it for residential purposes". The Wealth-tax Officer was further of the view that during the lifetime of the mother, the assesses had only an interest in expectancy in a fifth of the vested remainder and that they cannot be held to have owned the property and so notwithstanding the fact that the entire family was residing in the building, the claim for exemption had to be rejected.

(3.) SECTION 5(1)(iv) during the relevant assessment years read as follows :